Karnataka HC Notices Sri Lankan Judge's Rights Plea
07 Mar 2026
Karnataka Proposes Social Media Ban for Under-16s
07 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
07 Mar 2026
Punjab HC Acquits Ram Rahim in Journalist Murder
07 Mar 2026
Appellate Courts Can Rely on Unexhibited Public Documents Produced by Plaintiff: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
JASPREET SINGH
Vatika Nirman Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
U. P. Real Estate Regulatory Authority – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT
Jaspreet Singh, J.
This is a batch of 12 petitions whereby the petitioner company has assailed the judgment and order dated 02.01.2024 passed by the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as RERA). The private respondent had filed 12 separate complaints before the RERA, relating to different units of the project known as Urban Woods Phase-II launched by the petitioner company, Vatika Nirman Private Limited. All the 12 complaints have been decided by the common order dated 02.01.2024 which have been assailed by filing the aforesaid 12 separate petitions though the grounds and submissions is common in all, hence all the petitions have been clubbed together and are being decided by this common judgment.
2. Shri Shantanu Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner has primarily attacked the order passed by the RERA dated 02.01.2024 on the following grounds: (i) the impugned order is without jurisdiction, (ii) the relief granted by the RERA is not within its domain as it is not entitled to grant any declaratory relief; (iii) the impug
The existence of an alternate statutory remedy under the RERA Act limits the High Court's jurisdiction to entertain writ petitions, directing parties to the Appellate Tribunal for resolution of dispu....
The jurisdiction of the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal was affirmed, directing adjudication of compensation claims based on statutory authority under RERA.
The court upheld the requirement for total deposit of compensation and interest before hearing appeals under the Real Estate Act, affirming RERA's jurisdiction over disputes involving landowners as a....
The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 provides distinct remedies for refund and compensation, and the unqualified right of an allottee to get a refund of the amount deposited with th....
Judgments must be delivered by the Bench that conducted the hearing; failing this constitutes a nullity, violating fundamental principles of judicial procedure.
The Court emphasized that the High Court should not entertain a writ petition when an effective alternate remedy is available to the aggrieved person, unless exceptional circumstances exist.
The High Court's discretionary powers under Article 226 should not be invoked when sufficient alternate remedies are available, emphasizing the principle of exhaustion of remedies in civil litigation....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article